Election summary – non-guns edition
Some thoughts I’ve seen around (not all of them I agree with but it’s interesting to see what people think):
Heh:
The Republicans lost and the Democrats won for the same reason — they distanced themselves from their base.
When the Democrats were in charge.
A commenter here opined that We pulled a Spain…... I don’t think that’s the case at all but I’d say quite a few conservatives do.
The Quote of the Day comes from Chuck:
If the Republicans buy into the bipartisanship bull, then they had better get used to being backbenchers
In 2004, President Bush and the Republicans lived by Iraq. This year they died by Iraq.
Libertarians score more than the margin of victory in Montana.
November 9th, 2006 at 10:16 am
Also add: Bush has appointed his last good judge.
November 9th, 2006 at 1:29 pm
On what planet did the Republicans distance themselves from their base? From where I sit, there was no shortage of gay-bashing and other such pandering to evangelical Christians, for example.
November 9th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
Err, off the top of my head:
Small government
Spending
Deficits
Accountability
Honor and integrity
A lot of stuff from contract with America
Etc.
Yet, through it all, they did pander to the religious right.
November 9th, 2006 at 3:24 pm
Well, there’s what they do, and what they campaign on. I thought you were talking about the latter, rather than the former. Apologies. (Recall that their 2002 and especially 2004 campaigns relied heavily on the American public not paying attention to what they actually did.)
November 9th, 2006 at 8:56 pm
Come on now, 3% is a margin of error, not a margin of victory.
Candidates with a big (L) behind their names win as often as the ones with a big (C). Just check out the Peoples Republic of Tacoma Park in Maryland if you’re wondering what the (C) stands for.
November 9th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
[…] […]